I think military spending should be higher than hand outs. Is that a good enough example for you?

But why? Rather than having a list of who gets more and who gets less, how about we determine what each area actually needs in terms of resources and capital then pay them accordingly. If their needs to be a heirarchy of importance of what gets cut first if the money runs out before everyone is paid, then so be it. But it seems laughably simplistic to flatly say "Whatever public welfare gets in federal money defense needs to exceed it!"

I hate deadbeats who do nothing but get fat on the public dole as much as you but, despite your constant derision of "hand-outs", the fact of the matter is that most good people will need some kind of help some time in their life. How can we be called a "civilized nation" if we don't see that they get the help they need to get back on their feet?

I don't get upset about said deadbeats like you do (as evidenced by the constant harping on it) because it is a relatively small number of Americans who do so.

From Statistical Information and Demographics derived from the latest national census:

If you use those who are supported by Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF)--best described as a federal largess to indigent families with dependent children--as stated by the Dept. of Health the data suggests 1.7% of the total population that derive over 50% of their income from Welfare supports.

The number stated that receive any portion of their support from from welfare assistance--including food stamps--it is 29,900,000 or roughly 8% of the total population in the United States.

This breaks down to:

39% white 11,661,000 of 29,900,000 recipients

38% black 11,362,000 of 29,900,000

17% Hispanic 5,083,000 of 29,900,000

That's only 8% of Americans according the the data. And many of those people work but have jobs that pay too little to support themselves - hardly deadbeats.

That leaves the stated 1.7% of Americans who basically live off of Federal Welfare. That's less than 2% for heaven's sake. It's too many to be sure, but in the big scheme of things, with all the problems we have in the US, is it worth the amount of ranting and screaming people do when it is less than 2% of Americans doing it? That conceivably means 98% of Americans are NOT doing it and are trying to eek out an honest living. It's really a matte rof perspective for me. My annoyance about an issue is commensurate with the size of the issue as much as anything else, and for me it's just not worth getting all bent out of shape over.

This comment was edited on Oct 16, 2013, 10:50.

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” - Mahatma Gandhi